PREAMBLE
A consultative workshop between Western Equatoria State and Lakes State organized and facilitated by Mundri Relief and Development Association (MRDA) was held in Mundri Town from 19th-21st April 2011, attended by MPs from both states, Executive members from Western Equatoria State, Chiefs, Elders and Women’s representatives from Mvolo county.
The speaker of Lakes State Legislative Assembly (LSLA) and the Deputy Speaker of Western Equatoria State (WES) led their respective delegations to the workshop.
The three commissioners of Mvolo, Mundri West and Mundri East Counties attended the workshop and contributed positively to the resolution of the conflict.
We the participants of the consultative workshop by the need to unify the people of Southern Sudan, reduce ethnic conflicts, the suffering of the displaced people and the humanitarian crisis caused as a result of interethnic have met in Mundri.
The workshop was cognizant of the previous Mvolo and Mapourdit resolutions of 18/02/2011 and 5/04/2011 respectively that formed the part of these resolutions.
Key presentations were delivered by Western Equatoria State, Lakes State and a Fact Finding team to the conflict from SSLA which gave useful recommendations towards the Mvolo-Yirol West Community Conflict.
During the three days of the workshop the participants explored the root causes of the current conflict andsought ways and means to bring the two communities of Mvolo and Yirol West to coexist and return to the previous status of peaceful living.
1. Immediate cessation of hostilities by deploying neutral forces along the borders of Kokori, Wowo, Bahr Grindi, Lual, Lessi, War Ayel as presented by the two governors to the president during the security briefing meeting held on 9th April 2011 with sufficient logistics to be supervised by GOSS.
2. Members of Parliament from the 2 states together with their chiefs and commissioners should go to their people to talk to them about peace
3. High level neutral investigation committee formed by the president to immediately start their work.
4. Organization of a reconciliation meeting at Mapourdit to be attended by chiefs, communities of respective counties supported by MRDA, Partners, GOSS, Civil Society and the Church.
5. Immediate provision of humanitarian assistance for 6 months by State governments, NGOS, Ministry of humanitarian affairs and disaster management and people of good will.
6. Immediate Comprehensive disarmament programme of civilians to be carried out all over south Sudan by the GOSS ministry of SPLA and veteran Affairs.
7. Formation of peace committees at the grass roots levels by the Peace Commission and partners.
8. Formation of a working group to review implementation of these resolutions on an ongoing basis, remaining in constant contact by phone, email etc and to meet as a whole after 3 months in Mundri to comprehensively evaluate implementation of resolutions. This group should comprise of 7 representatives of W.E Legislative Assembly,7 representatives of Lakes Legislative Assembly, 2 Members of South Sudan Legislative Assembly,1 from the office of the president and representatives of MRDA, Nonviolent PeaceForce, SONAD, Diocese of Mundri.
9. Formation of neutral civilian monitoring committees to spend time with both communities and report regularly to the working group.
Tuesday 26 April 2011
Sunday 24 April 2011
Meeting for Peace
This week I have been mostly supporting the organisation and running of a reconcilication workshop in Mundri. If you're slightly bemused as to what that might be, don't worry, you're surely not alone.
Since early February outbursts of armed violence have devastated communities on either side of the Lakes State-Western Equatoria State border, concentrated in the neighboring counties of Yirol West in Lakes and Mvolo, one of the three counties of Greater Mundri in W.E and the next county from the one where I reside. Yirol West is predominantly home to a section of the Dinka cultural group called Dinka Ajar, whereas Mvolo is mostly the residence of people from the Jur group.
To date over 50 people have been recorded as dead and thousands have been displaced, with their homes and property destroyed or stolen. Thus both states are facing internal crisis arising from displacement. There are scarce resources to accommodate or feed IDPs in the short term and with rainy season beginning if return is not possible soon livelihoods and food security will be severely undermined, as smallholders will not be able to reach their fields to plant, cultivate and reap crops for the rest of the year.
There are many competing views as to why and how this conflict has developed. Certainly a young Jur man was murdered on February 8th and his motorbike stolen. Whilst the contention is that Dinka from a local cattle camp are responsible no criminal investigation was undertaken before a deadly revenge attack on the camp claimed 8 lives the next day. A cycle of revenge has spun out of control since then. Other underlying factors could include longer term animosity resulting from cultural difference, particularly around livelihoods. Dinka are noted for keeping cows and leading pastoral lifestyles, herding their cattle to where there is sufficient water and fertile grassland to keep them healthy. Yirol is a more arid area than Mvolo and Dinka herds have traditionally moved back and forth across the border to access land and rivers in Mvolo, occasionally coming into contact with farmers who feel their land is being violated without permission and whose work is negatively affected as a result. It seems that intra-communal conflict was minimized throughout the liberation struggle 1983-2005 but after the signing of the CPA has resumed on a cyclical basis, with violence flaring during dry season, when cattle keepers are forced to travel farther afield in locating the water they need.
There are many other allegations as to larger political agendas behind both the launching and the continued fuelling of the conflict but little supporting evidence is forthcoming to support such claims. It is clear that military and police response to the situation has been insufficient. Forces deployed to secure the border have not made it to their intended destinations and have failed to provide sufficient protection to civilian populations that would allow them to return to their homes. One potential reason for this is the risk for forces of either state of being implicated as actors in the conflict if they cross the border.
There is a process in place between the two governors (the most senior executives at Federal level) to produce solutions to the conflict but so far this process has produced results only on paper. After their first meeting violence intensified so at the beginning of April a second meeting was convened and the Governors resolved to take 8 points for action to the Office of the President himself in order to appeal for support. This is particularly significant in that it opens the possibility of neutral security forces and investigators reaching the ground in the affected areas to enforce any ceasefire and begin a process of judicial investigation, above the authority of the local commissioners and even the governors themselves. The governors also committed to holding a reconciliation conference at the earliest opportunity. History tells us that many such conferences have been held in this region over the past five years, and none of the plans emerging from them have been implemented.
MRDA, as a humanitarian organization concerned for the peace and development of South Sudan as a whole, especially as independence approaches, decided to reach out to concerned parties and try and contribute to a resolution of the current conflict. During monitoring visits for another project over the past 6 weeks the director of MRDA and members of our team have visited officials in either state, including Governors, Deputy Governors, the Ministry for Peace and CPA Implementation and the elected Legislative Assemblies, to try and establish channels of communication between the two state administrations. Essentially we wanted decisionmakers and leaders in each state to reach out to one another and disuss their shared interest in ending the conflict, protecting civilians and finding the real root causes.
Our intention as a civil society organization was to supplement and strengthen the current high level process by establishing more dialogue at more levels, using the legislative assemblies of each state as an access point and potentially convening meetings before the high profile conference to improve relationships and increase the chances of practically workable agreements being produced at that stage. Crucially we hoped to eventually involved chiefs at local level and ultimately even young people from each area that are directly participating in the violence; fighting and dying.
Our meetings with MPs from both assemblies, including those representing the counties involved, saw many high emotions and aspersions cast against the other, but both sets of representatives ultimately also recognized the desperate need for peace and their own responsibility to play their part in working toward that peace. We were able to directly connect the Deputy Speaker of W.E and the Speaker of Lakes to discuss ways forward and after our second visit to Rumbek, the capital of Lakes, were given a mandate to mobilize a meeting (aka a 'reconciliation workshop') with MPs, chiefs and representatives of the executive from each state, as a first step toward the objectives of
• strengthening interstate dialogue,
• diagnosing the root causes of the conflict and
• planning toward action for a sustainable peace in the area.
With this understanding reached on April 10th, we were left with 9 days to actually make it happen. With a significant sacrifice of MRDA financial, physical and human resources this was made possible. Mundri was suggested by the Lakes assembly as a suitable venue, as it is the home of MRDA and we would be well equipped to arrange accomodation, food and venues for the discussions. We also involved international civilian peacekeeping organisation Nonviolent Peaceforce, who have an office in Mundri and have been working on this conflict also.
The Lakes delegation was eventually airlifted in by UNIMIS (United Nations Mission in Sudan) helicopter, reducing the size of their delegation, and they sent only MPs, which didn’t go down too well with the chiefs in attendance of Mvolo, who were expecting a face to face meeting with their counterparts from Yirol. Given that it was a day later than originally planned, and we had experienced an ill tempered and confused first day with the Western Equatorian delegation alone, bringing the two groups together face to face felt like a significant achievement, regardless of precise composition. Present to provide their input and welcome the visitors were numerous local dignitaries, including the Commissioners for Mundri West and Mundri East and Bishop Bismarck of Sudan Episcopal Church, who hosted some of the proceedings in their Mundri Church. A faith perspective was useful in grounding participants before discussion began and emphasizing their personal responsibilities as peacemakers.
Also represented was the National South Sudan Legislative Assembly, which had mandated an investigative team of its own. This team led by the Rt. Hon Joseph Njeri, reported back to delegates and set a very positive tone, focusing on facts, preempting and discounting many of the allegations that we had heard in private and urging all parties, especially those with influence at local levels, to take urgent action. He also particularly highlighted the role that arms proliferation plays nationally in exacerbating local conflicts and stated that GOSS should organize a national civilian disarmament programme without delay to improve security and reduce fatalities. In this specific conflict there is even evidence that heavy weapons have been somehow appropriated from government armories and used in attacking civilian settlements. Finally in attendance to demonstrate their concern and share views were the Deputy Governor of Western Equatoria state, their Minister for Local Government and Legal Enforcement and the State Security Advisor. The national print and broadcast media were also represented.
The structure of the workshop, truncated as it was, still featured many lengthy speeches, in a semi-formal fashion, with little time for deliberation or discussion. Proceedings felt more like a town hall meeting than a facilitated group process, as the MRDA director and Board Member for Peace, Dr, Wesley Natana, chaired a succession of prepared submissions before choosing a small working group to prepare resolutions. With so many dignities to afford time to in the schedule given the South Sudanese principle of ‘observing protocol’ the process was a long way from any that I am used to in terms of participation and facilitation. This means that essentially only the areas of broad agreement were explored in any depth, without sufficient space for the latent conflicts of interest and opinion to surface and be addressed. Given the time constraints upon us and the nature of the group this may have been a necessary omission, especially given that the first resolution was for MRDA and all concerned parties to mobilize for another meeting, this time with representation of chiefs from both sides, and establish a working group with representation from both states and civil society groups to review the implementation of the resolutions on an ongoing basis.
Logistically organizing an event like this is a serious challenge in of itself, but the true challenge is ensuring the best atmosphere and facilitation for a positive, honest and constructive conversation about the issues and the way forward. Thankfully in this instance this was achieved. Our task as an organization as we reflect and look to the next stage of this process is to frankly assess how we managed to successfully run this event and what our problems and shortcomings were in doing so. We will be asking ourselves what we can learn for next time to further strengthen the dialogue, making it as inclusive and meaningful as possible. In addition we should be looking, with civil society partners, beyond formally structured meetings like this to the opportunities to address on a longer term basis some of the underlying issues in the area via funded programmes. Regardless of how much kudos we may attain by taking our present role in this peace building process, if we fail to help stop the violence then our efforts are in vain.
Since early February outbursts of armed violence have devastated communities on either side of the Lakes State-Western Equatoria State border, concentrated in the neighboring counties of Yirol West in Lakes and Mvolo, one of the three counties of Greater Mundri in W.E and the next county from the one where I reside. Yirol West is predominantly home to a section of the Dinka cultural group called Dinka Ajar, whereas Mvolo is mostly the residence of people from the Jur group.
To date over 50 people have been recorded as dead and thousands have been displaced, with their homes and property destroyed or stolen. Thus both states are facing internal crisis arising from displacement. There are scarce resources to accommodate or feed IDPs in the short term and with rainy season beginning if return is not possible soon livelihoods and food security will be severely undermined, as smallholders will not be able to reach their fields to plant, cultivate and reap crops for the rest of the year.
There are many competing views as to why and how this conflict has developed. Certainly a young Jur man was murdered on February 8th and his motorbike stolen. Whilst the contention is that Dinka from a local cattle camp are responsible no criminal investigation was undertaken before a deadly revenge attack on the camp claimed 8 lives the next day. A cycle of revenge has spun out of control since then. Other underlying factors could include longer term animosity resulting from cultural difference, particularly around livelihoods. Dinka are noted for keeping cows and leading pastoral lifestyles, herding their cattle to where there is sufficient water and fertile grassland to keep them healthy. Yirol is a more arid area than Mvolo and Dinka herds have traditionally moved back and forth across the border to access land and rivers in Mvolo, occasionally coming into contact with farmers who feel their land is being violated without permission and whose work is negatively affected as a result. It seems that intra-communal conflict was minimized throughout the liberation struggle 1983-2005 but after the signing of the CPA has resumed on a cyclical basis, with violence flaring during dry season, when cattle keepers are forced to travel farther afield in locating the water they need.
There are many other allegations as to larger political agendas behind both the launching and the continued fuelling of the conflict but little supporting evidence is forthcoming to support such claims. It is clear that military and police response to the situation has been insufficient. Forces deployed to secure the border have not made it to their intended destinations and have failed to provide sufficient protection to civilian populations that would allow them to return to their homes. One potential reason for this is the risk for forces of either state of being implicated as actors in the conflict if they cross the border.
There is a process in place between the two governors (the most senior executives at Federal level) to produce solutions to the conflict but so far this process has produced results only on paper. After their first meeting violence intensified so at the beginning of April a second meeting was convened and the Governors resolved to take 8 points for action to the Office of the President himself in order to appeal for support. This is particularly significant in that it opens the possibility of neutral security forces and investigators reaching the ground in the affected areas to enforce any ceasefire and begin a process of judicial investigation, above the authority of the local commissioners and even the governors themselves. The governors also committed to holding a reconciliation conference at the earliest opportunity. History tells us that many such conferences have been held in this region over the past five years, and none of the plans emerging from them have been implemented.
MRDA, as a humanitarian organization concerned for the peace and development of South Sudan as a whole, especially as independence approaches, decided to reach out to concerned parties and try and contribute to a resolution of the current conflict. During monitoring visits for another project over the past 6 weeks the director of MRDA and members of our team have visited officials in either state, including Governors, Deputy Governors, the Ministry for Peace and CPA Implementation and the elected Legislative Assemblies, to try and establish channels of communication between the two state administrations. Essentially we wanted decisionmakers and leaders in each state to reach out to one another and disuss their shared interest in ending the conflict, protecting civilians and finding the real root causes.
Our intention as a civil society organization was to supplement and strengthen the current high level process by establishing more dialogue at more levels, using the legislative assemblies of each state as an access point and potentially convening meetings before the high profile conference to improve relationships and increase the chances of practically workable agreements being produced at that stage. Crucially we hoped to eventually involved chiefs at local level and ultimately even young people from each area that are directly participating in the violence; fighting and dying.
Our meetings with MPs from both assemblies, including those representing the counties involved, saw many high emotions and aspersions cast against the other, but both sets of representatives ultimately also recognized the desperate need for peace and their own responsibility to play their part in working toward that peace. We were able to directly connect the Deputy Speaker of W.E and the Speaker of Lakes to discuss ways forward and after our second visit to Rumbek, the capital of Lakes, were given a mandate to mobilize a meeting (aka a 'reconciliation workshop') with MPs, chiefs and representatives of the executive from each state, as a first step toward the objectives of
• strengthening interstate dialogue,
• diagnosing the root causes of the conflict and
• planning toward action for a sustainable peace in the area.
With this understanding reached on April 10th, we were left with 9 days to actually make it happen. With a significant sacrifice of MRDA financial, physical and human resources this was made possible. Mundri was suggested by the Lakes assembly as a suitable venue, as it is the home of MRDA and we would be well equipped to arrange accomodation, food and venues for the discussions. We also involved international civilian peacekeeping organisation Nonviolent Peaceforce, who have an office in Mundri and have been working on this conflict also.
The Lakes delegation was eventually airlifted in by UNIMIS (United Nations Mission in Sudan) helicopter, reducing the size of their delegation, and they sent only MPs, which didn’t go down too well with the chiefs in attendance of Mvolo, who were expecting a face to face meeting with their counterparts from Yirol. Given that it was a day later than originally planned, and we had experienced an ill tempered and confused first day with the Western Equatorian delegation alone, bringing the two groups together face to face felt like a significant achievement, regardless of precise composition. Present to provide their input and welcome the visitors were numerous local dignitaries, including the Commissioners for Mundri West and Mundri East and Bishop Bismarck of Sudan Episcopal Church, who hosted some of the proceedings in their Mundri Church. A faith perspective was useful in grounding participants before discussion began and emphasizing their personal responsibilities as peacemakers.
Also represented was the National South Sudan Legislative Assembly, which had mandated an investigative team of its own. This team led by the Rt. Hon Joseph Njeri, reported back to delegates and set a very positive tone, focusing on facts, preempting and discounting many of the allegations that we had heard in private and urging all parties, especially those with influence at local levels, to take urgent action. He also particularly highlighted the role that arms proliferation plays nationally in exacerbating local conflicts and stated that GOSS should organize a national civilian disarmament programme without delay to improve security and reduce fatalities. In this specific conflict there is even evidence that heavy weapons have been somehow appropriated from government armories and used in attacking civilian settlements. Finally in attendance to demonstrate their concern and share views were the Deputy Governor of Western Equatoria state, their Minister for Local Government and Legal Enforcement and the State Security Advisor. The national print and broadcast media were also represented.
The structure of the workshop, truncated as it was, still featured many lengthy speeches, in a semi-formal fashion, with little time for deliberation or discussion. Proceedings felt more like a town hall meeting than a facilitated group process, as the MRDA director and Board Member for Peace, Dr, Wesley Natana, chaired a succession of prepared submissions before choosing a small working group to prepare resolutions. With so many dignities to afford time to in the schedule given the South Sudanese principle of ‘observing protocol’ the process was a long way from any that I am used to in terms of participation and facilitation. This means that essentially only the areas of broad agreement were explored in any depth, without sufficient space for the latent conflicts of interest and opinion to surface and be addressed. Given the time constraints upon us and the nature of the group this may have been a necessary omission, especially given that the first resolution was for MRDA and all concerned parties to mobilize for another meeting, this time with representation of chiefs from both sides, and establish a working group with representation from both states and civil society groups to review the implementation of the resolutions on an ongoing basis.
Logistically organizing an event like this is a serious challenge in of itself, but the true challenge is ensuring the best atmosphere and facilitation for a positive, honest and constructive conversation about the issues and the way forward. Thankfully in this instance this was achieved. Our task as an organization as we reflect and look to the next stage of this process is to frankly assess how we managed to successfully run this event and what our problems and shortcomings were in doing so. We will be asking ourselves what we can learn for next time to further strengthen the dialogue, making it as inclusive and meaningful as possible. In addition we should be looking, with civil society partners, beyond formally structured meetings like this to the opportunities to address on a longer term basis some of the underlying issues in the area via funded programmes. Regardless of how much kudos we may attain by taking our present role in this peace building process, if we fail to help stop the violence then our efforts are in vain.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
